Skip to main content

About your Search

Search Results 0 to 49 of about 95 (some duplicates have been removed)
you, we are adjourned. ♪ >> hello, and welcome to the department of elections right choice voting instructional video. it is part of the department of elections right choice voting outreach campaign and is designed to educate san francisco rig franciscoht choice voting. today we will learn what it is and who is elected using this voting method. we will also talk about with the ranked joyce l. looks like and how to market correctly. finally, we will see how the ranked joyce voting process works and to you an example of an election using ranked choice of voting. so, what is ranked joyce voting? in march 2002 san francisco voters adopted a charter to implement ranked choice of voting, also known as instant runoff voting. san francisco voters will use it to elect most local officials by selecting a first choice candidate in the first column on the ballot and deborah second and third choice candidates in the second and third columns resect to do -- respectively. this makes it possible to elect local officials with the majority of votes. more than 50% without the need for a second runof
ordinance by elected official or department head occurredment i think you are continuing to drop the key phrase of 6734, that it's elected official department head or city managerial employee. and you should not drop the term, managerial here or throughout the rest of the proposed recommendation. >> okay. referral. means a written document from the task force to the commission initiating an ethics commission complaint. i think that definition can be modified to reflect that the referral is a document from the task force finding a violation of the sunshine ordinance. >> earlier you said alleging a violation. >> i mean they found a violation. whether we agree is a different story. but i think that a referral indicates. we wouldn't consider in a show-cause hearing a referral that did not find violation. we need to be clear that the task force found a violation to treat this with a show-cause procedure. okay. so then the last thing on this issue is what mr. shaw raised, the department head issue. >> one thing that came out of the last meeting, 6734 omits the employee from the referral part.
of democracy. if we elect you, how do we know you will stay in office and not be sent to the ethics commission? how can you as peers and coworkers [speaker not understood]? aren't you concerned about the precedence this may cause by putting you in the glass house and making your elected office more vulnerable? please reinstate the elected chair. god bless you that you make the right decision. thank you. >> thank you. next speaker. >>> hi, my name is brenda barrels and i'm a member of slu 10 21. i'm a city employee and i'm here on my own time. what i'd like to say is that in the beginning our union endorsed ross mirkarimi. i was one of the people that worked my butt off to get him elected and why. so, i think we can't forget why he was elected in the first place. he was elected in the first place because there wasn't any other candidate that was running that would care for the people of color that are in the jails better than ross could. and that still hasn't changed. those people are still in the jails and they still need the help of somebody like ross mirkarimi to try to give them a chance at
-citizen members of san francisco to vote in city elections. in your opinion, which city elections, if any, should be open to participation by non-citizen residents and which non-citizen residents should be allowed to vote in those elections? >> the harsh reality is that so many non-citizens still have children in our public schools here in san francisco, throughout the state of california and throughout the united states. as all of you undoubtedly know. with that being said, it's vitally important that those parents still have a say in the education of their children. i would certainly support and promote voting by those parents in school board elections in san francisco. by implication own a community college election would fit in that rubric, to support college advancement to people who have traditionally been put at the margins of our society. in those two elections, i think, are the most fundamental in the sense that they go to the root of advancement in this country and the obtaining of the american dream. so the school board and community college board i would certainly support that. >> t
with an election every year and eliminating the requirement they alternate the president from one of the industry'ies, one of the sectors of the commission is free to elect whomever they feel is the most appropriate person to be president, and that the down by that stipulation. -- be bound by that stipulation. is there anyone who would like to discuss further? >> i would like to say i am not in favor of just moving forward with that. i think there are a lot of things that go into creating bylaws. i do not think there needs to be -- i think if someone wants to be president for a third term, there should be special requirements that should be met by that person as far as how many votes they get, and i think it is good to keep voices rotating. i think it is set up to get as many voices as possible heard on the commission, and i understand on this commission there would be many good reasons to continue with the leadership and we have had, but i do not think this is something i would be in favor of changing straight out i as stated. >> even with the changes it would be of to the commission to alive wh
violations by elected officials and department heads. >> that's good. >> otherwise we know how we got to this set of questions. otherwise people that pick it up for the first time will say, what is the difference between those two expectations. why are they separate. and we can separate them when there is a consequence that is different. but i think it tangles you up as it currently stands. >> commissioner renne. >> i agree with commission studley, that to combine "a" and "c" into one "a," make it "a." >> or "b." i was putting willful first because it's more severe. >> you would do willful first? >> because it's a higher order. >> i would make what is now "a" and "c" read, nonwillful violations by elected officials, department heads and city officers and employees. and that gets them all. and then say willful violations by city officers. and i agree it's confusing and your paren probably takes care of it. rather than a paren, i may say willful violations by city officers and employees other than elected officials and department heads. >> that's what i had originally. but i think it's
the ousting or the possible ousting of sheriff ross mcarimi, an elected official here in the city and county of san francisco. while i recognize some of you as honorable, supervisors, there are a few of you that are lackies for the mayor. whether you want to recognize it or look at me or not and realize you're occupying his old district and things like that. these are things that you have to realize. what kind of people are watching. not only san francisco. i do a radio talk show, it's heard across the country and around the world on the armed forces network. and i get e-mails saying what's going on in san francisco? what's going on in san francisco? this is the biggest case of political assassination since 1978 when harvey milk and george moscone i were taken out by an insane dan white. i mean, if you want to be the mayor's lackey, go ahead, be the mayor's lacky. you know, oust ross if you think he committed official misconduct. a lot of people don't feel that way. former police officers spent nine years with the sfpd. i wrote curriculum for the sf board of university school district, [spea
, the november 6th election is coming up quickly in a short six weeks, it's a critical national election but also local races are critical as well. >> thank you supervisor mar, supervisor avalos? >> thank you, just a couple of items, just a note related to supervisor mar's last comments, resident of district 11, mike brown has been moving around with a bus registering people to vote in areas where there's very low voter turnout and doing a lot of outreach to people that are ex-felons who are eligible to vote who may not know they're eligible to vote since they passed parole, i think it's important work that's going on in san francisco and i want to commend mike brown for his work in the community. colleagues, you might remember last year, i had a hearing about the america's cup, their workforce development and local business plan, local business inclusion plan, making sure we hit our stride around local businesses taking part in america's cup and benefits from america cup events, as well as hiring local residents in some of the temporary jobs that are created in the america's cup, some of the sta
. thank you for coming out tonight on a cold foggy san francisco evening. this district election is really important. i am proud to be here. this is a great organization. we have nine candidates and hello everyone. it's a pleasure to see everyone in the beginning and hopefully they remember me later. the way it will work is the candidates will have one minute that you submitted. i have four questions to start with, plus the league will have their own questions and we invite you to get your questions and someone will get them. the questions have been submitted on the leauge of women voters website and every candidate is going to answer every question, so now we have time keepers. our time keepers, our lovely time keepers are out in front here and they will hold up a yellow card to signify to the candidates have third seconds remaining and a red card when it's time to stop and we ask that everyone be respectful,y -- no booing and no hissing and we want to stay on the time line and you have important decisions to make on november 6 so this will give you an opportunity to hav
in school board elections in san francisco. by implication own a community college election would fit in that rubric, to support college advancement to people who have traditionally been put at the margins of our society. in those two elections, i think, are the most fundamental in the sense that they go to the root of advancement in this country and the obtaining of the american dream. so the school board and community college board i would certainly support that. >> thank you, miss olague. >> i don't think there is much to add to that. i know a couple of years ago there was a ballot measure that failed. so i would totally support bringing this back and allowing people to reconsider it. because as mr. everett said, i think it is important for people, especially those who have children in the school district and also students at the city college level to be able to weigh in on those types of questions. and i would be open to considering other elections as well. but i think as mr. everett mentioned, at a minimum, i would consider supporting and allowing non-citizens to vote in e
of this discussion of all of the polices. are our elected officials making policy decisions that are sustainable? that promote equity? or are they for-sale to the highest bidder? these are the things that we need to address, otherwise you will have the exact same problems of people asking for more and more people and creating a city where there is very wealthy and very poor people. so i would like to give a quick shout out in that direction to supervisor olague, who is having the san francisco housing authority try to film its meetings. it doesn't even meet at city hall and this is the kind of inequity i'm talking about. we need accountability. so i appreciate that and we need that. thank you. >> thank you, mr. everett. >> i'm the type the progressive who grieves believes that we're only as wealthy as the least among us. so means that in san francisco we can only go as far as the african-american young men and women who have been economically disadvantaged for generations here in the city. we need to provide jobs. with when we talk about green jobs of future and sustainable produce, we need
election in the next few weeks and people will have an opportunity to vote and as you're deciding on candidates and ballot measures to vote for i would like to draw your attention to proposition 30 and 38. with the understanding that if these prop propositions pass they have significant impact on funding. if neither one passes financial resources will be greatly diminished for schools in california and specifically here in san francisco. the lodge cuts include that we will be forced to shorten the school year by five days this year and nine days next year in addition to the substantial cuts that will be at school sites and for students. i want to encourage all of you to vote in the election. vote your witness but there's vote. the. >> >> schools of association or wasp as they are known in the district is accreditation process that all schools do to award diplomas. six high schools under went accreditation last spring and if you have never been through one it's a process that is rigorous and consists of teams from each school and reviewing academic achievement, structures an
? >> yes, >> i have a comment. and i just, i want to raise sort of rule number six on the election of officers. just to open up the conversation. you know, i don't know if i feel strongly one way or the other, does feel like a one-year term is relatively short for president and vice president to be in office. and maybe commissioner caen can answer this a bit and probably best since she's been here. but also this issue that a serving president or vice president is ineligible for a second term. i don't know where the origin of that was and i'm just curious. i believe commissioner caen that maybe, i'm asking about the election of officers and how it's a one-year term and you can't serve an additional second year term. just the origin of that and whether that seems to be a policy that the commission feels like is a good one. >> well, it has been the policy of the commission ever since i recall. and the idea behind it, or one of ideas behind it is that if one serves as an officer, they get to know the commission limp as you go from being a president, you're still very involved in the co
. and elected with 10,000 more votes than ed lee. i can't believe this, this is a misdemeanor, you are committing criminal misdemeanors, shame on you. i told this to scott weiner, this is grounds for recall for the brown act on may 24 of 2011. and there were violations on may 24 of 2011. the building they lived in is a parking lot and sold illegally. hundreds and thousands of dollars of public property for private gain. i don't know if the purchaser is a contributor to mayor lee. because at that time he wasn't running for office. remember, run, ed, run. and no violation of the consortium laws, right mr. st. croix. and now a head member of the campaign is supervisor alogi. shame on her. this is incredible of what is going on in san francisco. and i am sorry i didn't prepare my comments in advance. >> good afternoon. my name is dana buller. i am new to this commission. what i know i get from newspapers or reports from people who are watching videos of things that happened. i am concerned because i think that the -- any actions you might contemplate today might should be held off beca
. i work with people to find results and get results and i have been effective as elected official for eight years and i will bring that into the board of supervisors. thank you very much. >> i am bob squarey. i live in san francisco. the 49ers were founded in 46 in my honor. i want to thank them -- [laughter] i will be given my season tickets up when i leave the city. i had them for over 40 years. they're gone but with that said i started two successful businesses in san francisco. i have a childrens' foundation "one children at a time inc." and did jobs around the world and every nickel i raised go to helping the kids. i will bring a strong budget control initiative to san francisco and i will show it by opening my district office in either on ocean avenue, lake side, and out of the money they give i will take a part of that fund and pay for that office in san francisco, but i will open it in the district so i will serve the people. bob squirey. i appreciate your support. >> thank you. mr. rogers. >> i am glen rogers and a native son of san francisco. i went to school h
law and sunshine ordinance and we're given the run around over illegal elections. there's millions of dollars being stolen by the councils, the residence councils. it's off the hook and nobody talks about it. i want to mention a couple of points on the rush through this process here. there's a pattern of rushing through the process. when the sunshine task force didn't have one member who is disables, they stop and when the ethics commission has miss mean ors going on and the meeting is not properly agendaed and ada violations are going on you have an obligation to stop the meeting until corrections can be made or you are under liability for ada lawsuit. this should be elementary in san francisco and in closure i want to come back to did you remove proceedings in the charter from the deal from the final document from fifteen dot one zero five? did i get that right? a. we haven't taken any action. speaker: okay thank you so much. this removal from office really needs to come forward especially when there's such an unequal application in the laws in this city. thanks. speaker: i'm not
? and if elected, what would you do to address it? and we'll start at one end of the table and move to the other. so miss breed or miss selby. >> boy, it's hard to pick one. i think that right now we are really suffering -- i'm going to look at district 5 in particular. we have a safety issue in district 5 right now. it has gotten more dangerous, particularly in the lower haight, hayes valley and even in pacific heights. we have a situation where in 23 days this were 100 assaults. and of those 100 assaults, 67 of them were for iphones. i actually have a relatively simple solution for this. i would like us to look at -- it would be nice if you could ask apple to disable their phones. they now able to erase your information, but they will not disable your phone or at&t. unfortunately i'm afraid government is going to have to step in and say you must do this or we will sue you. there is lots of police time and energy and worse, there are many, many citizens who are getting really badly hurt for their iphones and their ipads. >> thank you, mr. resignato. >> i'm going to go back to transit issu
officer or employee other than elected official and department head. >> yeah, it's the word "made" is not grammatically correct. >> it's unnecessary. >> okay, i think that's probably correct. so we propose striking "made." that's good. any other comments on 2-1-a? 2-1-b. my only suggestion would be that we provide for the possibility that we could set a special meeting. i don't think it necessarily has to be at the next ethics commission meeting. i want to give us to set something. >> you want to say regular or special? >> yeah, that's what i was thinking, regular or special. actually at a regular or special. >> were we intending to commit ourselves to a time horizon? or outside or the overall time of getting resolution sufficient. to compel us to keep moving. >> i can help, one issue that came out of the last meeting. we handle these matters quickly so people get these records fast. the idea is that we get it at the next meeting we have, that is regularly scheduled. provided we can do it legally under the agenda requirements. there is no issue if you want to set a special meetin
sheriff, ross karini be reinstated to his post which he was elected. what's happening in the city of san francisco so sheriff and his family is more than we [inaudible] and i ask you to stop it. the mayor ed lee has used too much resources in this prosecution, political prosecution, resources, we should be utilizing for the welfare of our community. in addition, this process has been a bad process attempting man and allegations of perjury. what has happened -- it is an abuse, what happened to ross mirkarimi is an abuse of power, when suspended without pay, denying him the opportunity to the due process. >> senior, gracias. next speaker. >> okay, is that it? >> thank you so much. >> thank y next speaker. >> yes, sir, we need the overhead. yes, i'm a resident of san francisco, i'm from philmore, california, the registration drive to commemorate the children who died october 15, 1963 in salvage rachel motive of the ku klux klan niggers, but i'm here today, that's my soul responding and it's responding to radio station kpoo, when you talk about diversity, i'm not divers
you know that in my opinion district seven needs a progressive in this upcoming election i believe i'm that person. i came in second in 2008. i am the only candidate up here that ran in 2008. garnered 19% of the vote and i came in second, and i believe that we need to make our city affordable again for working people, the middle class people. it's not an affordable place to live anymore for most working people so that is something i will work on. and i will oppose major land use development because i believe it's a threat to the preservation of our neighborhoods. it's gentifies our city and it makes it basically a hostile place to live in my opinion especially living out in park merced so if you have a progressive on november 6 vote for me. thank you. >> thank you. ms. gavin. >> i am lynn gavin and i'm a pastor and like so many women there are multiple things that i do and we multi-task and kind of boring even though we didn't term that world. i am running because of the corruption and malfeasance at city hall. i got involved and i was angry they didn't disclose to me they wa
states court of appeals for the second circuit. interest include election law, administrative law, statutory interpretation, constitutional law and property and natural resources law. he is a resident of san francisco's mission district. we are honored to work chris almendorf. [ applause ] >> thank you very much and thank you to all of the candidates who are here today. we're very fortunate to be joined by six candidates and what i hope will soon be seven. all of the candidates have agreed to ask their supporters to be respectful of other candidates and the audience and to maintain quiet during the forum. i ask you to respect that commitment. every aspect of this forum will be equally fair to all participating candidates. as everyone here knows candidate debates are often limited to latitudinal appears and personal attack. our debate focuses on critical areas of policy disagreement among the leading candidates. so this end the league of women voters of san francisco and the san francisco public press working with researchers at uc davis, developed an issue position survey for the
. if an elected official or department head and also an employee who is not a department head are respondents in a matter. it would just help me to know if we would have two procedures using the two different meth methodologies or they would combine. my thought is because the burden is different, we would have two proceedings. and i wanted to ask whether we thought about that. >> are you talking about several two different individuals? one of whom is department head, for example, and one whom is a public employee? >> exactly. >> my understanding is that it's different proceedings. is that right, mr. chatfield? >> the way they are drafted now, yes. the standard is different for a department head or elected official. they are separated in two different proceedings. >> procedurally is there anything other than the burden issue, the presumption that is different from the two sets of procedures? >> not significantly. the hearing most likely will follow in the same way. >> they are both public and the standard and evidentiary issues and the procedure. seem to be the same. >> the role of the commiss
curious. i believe commissioner caen that maybe, i'm asking about the election of officers and how it's a one-year term and you can't serve an additional second year term. just the origin of that and whether that seems to be a policy that the commission feels like is a good one. >> well, it has been the policy of the commission ever since i recall. and the idea behind it, or one of ideas behind it is that if one serves as an officer, they get to know the commission limp as you go from being a president, you're still very involved in the commission and the business. it rotates the power so there's not one person that has the power and give us more of a sense of belonging. >> yeah. i mean, i was just wondering if two years or there's the opportunity to serve a second year would be of interest to the commission? >> one of problems with a two-year rule is under the current one-year rule, within somebody's term of office, the odds are pretty good they will be chair. because people come and go. not everybody serves the full term. just historically, that happens. so for the reasons that comm
. it is of course, in the spirit of the expected national, regional, and state elections we are preparing for. it is also a reminder of the importance of our civic duty and all the different departments we have created. public engagement is extremely important to the way we run government in san francisco. it has always been about public engagement. we need the last bodies come a different viewpoints, different economic classics -- classes, ethnicities, and regions of the city to be well-represented on everything we do because that is what makes our city great. it is that the verse you point coming together to focus -- it is that diverse viewpoint coming together to focus and figure out with the public what it is that we should do, that it is time well, well thought out, and what we need to do to show the rest of the country that this city can work itself out of the economic doldrums and into presenting hope and economic opportunity for everybody, no matter their backgrounds. we also reflect our regional values in this city in many different ways. we want to continue selecting people who will
to these neighborhoods around infrastructure and affordable housing. while i appreciate what a citywide elected can bring to balance at how we look at citywide development i want to reiterate these plans are only in two districts of san francisco and we're most accountable to those neighborhoods and communities. >> supervisor campos? >> thank you. i want to associate myself with the comments of supervisor kim, and i think with the presentation, she referenced checks and balances and that is the key in terms of how fast a i think we need to approach this. the reality for this agency to fill the mandate given to it, all of us need to be part of that work, part of that process, which is why that i think the exploration of split appointments make sense. i saw one of the residents in my district, former redevelopment agency commissioner miguel bustos, who does a great job on that agency. and i do think that the kind of approach that he brought to the job is the kind of thing we want to see from members of this body. i don't think that is precluded by a split-appointment process. so i do think that we need
like to thank the elected leaders and community leaders who convened this hearing this evening. you know, i worry not only about the well-being of my former students who are now freshmen in high school, but i also worry about their parents and how well equipped they are to support their children throughout their now high school journey. as studies have documented, a key component to student success are strong school family partnership and solid parent involvement. now, as the powers that be determine whether or not a task force is ultimately convened on this very important matter, i implore that you mandate parent representation within this group and a parent education component on the overall matter. there are a wealth of parents facing organizations in the city, magic coleman, parents for public schools and a number of others. please use us as content experts. as you continue to investigate this matter addressing academic achievement, opportunities for african americans, youth and other target groups as well. thank you. >> thank you very much. (applause) >> next speaker, please. >
holding property and voting in elections. >> susan b. anthony dedicated her life to reform. >> suffrage in the middle of the 19th century accomplished one goal, it was diametrically opposed to this idea. >> many feared it would be corrupted by politics. >> women in the 19th century had to convince male voters that having the vote would not change anything. that woman would still be devoted to the home, the family, that they would remain pure and innocent, that having the vote would not corrupt them. >> support gradually grew in state and local campaigns. >> leaders like ellen clark sgt come repeatedly stopping these meetings -- , repeatedly stopping these meetings as a politically active figure. doing everything they could to ground the campaign in domesticity. >> despite their efforts, the link made it tough whenever voters were in the big city. a specialist in francisco. >> the problem with san francisco is that women's suffrage as an idea was associated. >> susan b. anthony joined the provision party. a deadly idea in san francisco. liquor was the foundation of the economy. and >> an
, yes. the standard is different for a department head or elected official. they are separated in two different proceedings. >> procedurally is there anything other than the burden issue, the presumption that is different from the two sets of procedures? >> not significantly. the hearing most likely will follow in the same way. >> they are both public and the standard and evidentiary issues and the procedure. seem to be the same. >> the role of the commission/staff is different. >> that is true. the role of the executive director and staff would be very different. >> the comment i wanted to add at the outset was about timing. i agree with you that we have had very helpful conversations with the task force through two cycles of review. i wish we had been able to get comments on this written draft as we get closer and closer we think to something that resolves a number of these issues. but am i correct, we can go back and amend if after the task force comes together again and is able to begin meeting. if they reviewed it and had suggestions we could at that time take them? >> that is my
with the exceptions of complaints and of the elected officials and department heads. the reason that doesn't track, in 3764, department heads and other managerial employees. and the idea is that if you remember your high school gramm grammar, it's a nonrestrictive clause. and even though with respect to official misconduct, it defines department heads to include other managerial employees. it does not restrict your hearing process. which should be reflected here and in the next chapter, chapter 3. with respect to the representation of these complaints. i have always felt very strongly, it's less clear in the current task force. when a citizen brings a complaint to the task force, the citizen has done his part. and from that point it's up to the task force to advice departments, city employees on the enforcement of the law. and if that means referring it somewhere else, the task force itself is the interested party at that point. it's not up to the complainant to turn this into a steeple chase or obstacle course. and block the complainant at every instance. because the entire city has interest in e
Search Results 0 to 49 of about 95 (some duplicates have been removed)